Exactly. Leading a woman around on a leash, while it might not be your thing, is not illegal.

No, but it is worth looking into. I recall an incident some years back where police busted what they thought was a rape in progress, but when all of the parties were questioned, it turned out to be a staged rape that the woman wanted, a fantasy of hers or something. No one was charged, but some things are worth looking into.

I think that people who engage in kinky practices such as pretend rape and D+S probably understand why perhaps a cop might stop by to make sure everything is okay. In fact, I'd be happy and feel much safer and have more faith in the system if that had indeed happened. Nothing wrong with being kinky, so long as all parties involved are okay with it. If someone calls and says they see a woman (or man) chained in a basement - yeah it COULD just be kinky sex but it also could be something much worse.

Benevolent Misanthrope:Hindsight, 20/20, that sort of thing We know today it was bad. 2 weeks ago, we would have been vilifying the cops for going after people doing something totally legal, especially if the victim had said it was consensual.

"Going after" is not the same as checking up on a neighbod's complaint to make sure that no one was doing something against their will.

No you didn't and that's what I'm pointing out. We Liberals are big believers in "small government" you see, and so don;t believe that, as long as no one is being harmed, the government has a right to regulate private behavior, Thus we are all in favor of anyone getting their swerve on in any fashion they like, so long as A) everyone involved is an adult B) everyone freely consents to the activity at hand. Now which of those two conditions are not present in this scenario? Equating these guys with the S&M community is about as offensive as the idiots that link homosexuality and pedophilia.

Liberals are big believers in sexual license. That's the only 'small government' aspect of the liberal's agenda."F*ck anything, anyway you like, and never have to deal with the consequences. Anything else, better have the right goddamn forms filled out and the proper fees paid, and if you can't manage those things, well, f*ck off then."

Lollipop165:I think that people who engage in kinky practices such as pretend rape and D+S probably understand why perhaps a cop might stop by to make sure everything is okay. In fact, I'd be happy and feel much safer and have more faith in the system if that had indeed happened. Nothing wrong with being kinky, so long as all parties involved are okay with it. If someone calls and says they see a woman (or man) chained in a basement - yeah it COULD just be kinky sex but it also could be something much worse.

*raises hand*

I would much rather have to explain to the cops why I'm crawling around naked on a dog leash than risk having a kidnap/rape/abuse victim go undiscovered because the cops chose to ignore the call, for exactly the same reason I didn't mind having to explain to the cops a couple of times that no, my boyfriend wasn't abusing me, we were just having a very loud argument. It's certainly true that the police can't investigate *every* call about someone getting freaky in the backyard, but most BDSM folks have the sense to keep scenes out of public view in the first place.

/And those who don't might do well to get a polite reminder about it. I know a guy who ended up serving six months of community service because he went out in the woods, undressed himself, put on handcuffs and leg cuffs, and went running around on the trails. He stumbled across a couple of hikers who called the police because they thought he was an escaped convict, and was charged with public indecency.//So remember, kids, if you're going to run around naked and handcuffed in the woods, STAY OFF THE TRAILS.

colinspooky:Yep, too many people enjoy thing others find unusual. If the police were called every time, doughnut stores would go broke across your whole nation, with the resulting job losses across associated businesses

Exactly. Like another poster said, a very small minority women enjoy simulated rape, so the police should stop responding to reported rapes because it is probably just one of them. A small number of other people enjoy playing "fight club" so they should also stop responding to reported assaults as well. Contacting the parties involved to ensure that they are all consenting would take waaaay too much work, so it is best to assume that they are in the minority who do consent to such things.

Please, Cleveland PD ignored a serial killer for years. There were abuse reports made by "crackheads" and "hookers" so they were not followed-up, and a madman was able to kill several women and keep their bodies in his home. The caveat? The complaints about rancid meat were traced to the meat factory down the street, so the health department cited them and they paid to have all new drainage systems installed. When the smells didn't stop, they kept fining the meat plant... all the while the bodies of seven women were decomposing in a house... including a few in the back yard, and because the people who tried to report it were "nobodies" the CPD didn't even inspect the house when the guy claimed it was a lover's quarrel.

Benevolent Misanthrope:If your neighbor was a batshiat fundie who though blow jobs were a form of coercion, caught a glimpse through your drapes, and called the cops on you every goddamn time you got a blow job, how would that make you feel about things?

I see the tards are still acting like this a politics thread. Why don't you go shove your favorite political animal mascot up your ass, and leave the adults to talk about this case. There's a whole tab where you can display your stupidity like a peacock.

legion_of_doo:ciberido: Yes, but the big difference between the two groups is that Conservatives try to CLAIM they're the party of small government. You very rarely find a Liberal or Democrat in the USA asserting that smaller government is what they're fighting for, and that the other side is bad because they want Big Government.

So what you say is true, but if you are trying to use it as a BSABSVR argument, it fails.

well, both sides claim to love "freedom"... but, collectively, each side only supports the freedoms that mesh with their agendas.

you cannot claim that any mere mortal or their org is less flawed than another unless you identify with some wing nut group.

I can certainly claim that Democrats are more honest about what their goals are than Republicans, because, you know, I just explained in my last post exactly how Democrats are more honest about "Big Government" than Republicans. So if you reduce "more moral" to "more honest about their intentions," then yes, Democrats absolutely are more moral, and that's as objective a statement about which of two groups are more moral as anyone could make.

I do accept, however, that to most people, which of two groups is more moral is a much more complex question than "which of two groups is most honest about their intentions."

As for both sides claiming to love freedom, yes, that's true. But that, in turn, is because freedom isn't as simple or one-dimensional as so many people like to believe. The conflict arises when one group loves freedoms A, C, D, and F and a second group loves freedoms B, C, and E. You can't have absolute freedom of A, and absolute freedom of B, and absolute freedom of C, etc., so a civil society has to balance them. But of course you have different groups arguing about which freedoms are most important, while at the same time claiming that the other group "doesn't love freedom."

EvilMonkeyBoy:Also, the brothers, as skeevy as they look were not charged and and according to the girls were never involved.

Maybe Stockholm, but it looks like there is only one monster in the Castro family at the moment.

Saw that. Looks like the two brothers were arrested, because they were with Ariel Castro when he was arrested. That has to make the Castro family feel a little better that they have one evil douche in the family, and not three.

I'm not believing the story that someone saw them walking the girls around with a dog leach and called 911. I think that is somebody making up a story to get some attention. The guy that found them said that there wasn't anything abnormal about the guys that kidnapped them. He said that he would regularly see them in their backyard playing with their dogs and messing with their bikes. I seriously doubt that they would have their victims out in a yard that was that visible by their neighbors.

Exactly. Leading a woman around on a leash, while it might not be your thing, is not illegal.

however leading a NAKED one around on a leash outside, at the very least violates public deceny laws which is enough to check it ou

Not if it's in the backyard.

I cast spells naked in the backyard as part of my spiritual path. I would really rather not have to interrupt my ritual every single time because some fricken busybody thinks I'm doing something demonic.

/key phrase is "expectation of privacy"

I got bad news for you and your "skyclad" religious observances, hon, You can get busted for "indecent exposure" even when you are in the privacy of your own home and the person you "exposed" yourself to was trespassing across your property. Just ask this guy:

and yes "reasonable expectation of privacy is in fact the phrase that pays, but ti doesn't work the way you think it idoes. Courts have basically said that anytime you are within the line of sight of another person, you have no expectation of privacy, even if that party (say the police) have to use binoculars or a telescope to observe you). I help run an event that includes a clothing optional ethos, and I'm a lawyer so I have very carefully educated myself on these laws. (the event protects itself by having a screen of vegetation all around the event, having a "no nudity beyond the gate" policy and renting land from an owner who has an "understanding" with the local law enforcement)

Exactly. Leading a woman around on a leash, while it might not be your thing, is not illegal.

it is if it is against her will. Like, if it was part of her imprisonment. And between this and the guy that had 11 women's bodies buried in his backyard, I think it is fair to say Cleveland police have failed to serve and protect their community.

SithLord:PunGent: SithLord: Magorn: SithLord: Who cares. It's old news now. What these men did shouldn't be a crime. They were merely acting out their fantasies in the privacy of their own home. They should be praised for coming out as doms. What they did was not morally corrupt. They should be allowed to marry their subs. Praise the Cleveland police for not prying in the lives of private citizens and letting them carry on their business.

Kids should fear guns, not innocent kidnappers who just want to get their jollies. What is wrong with the close-minded tea-tards?

hey look another "Conservative" who fails to understand the phrase "between CONSENTING adults" HMM, maybe THAT's why Republicans are always going on about rape, because they just can;t wrap thier head around the concept?

Another liberal who doesn't understand I used your side's talking points when stating how morally corrupt this country has become.

If you're not trolling, kindly pick a decade in this nation's history when you think we were less 'morally corrupt'.

SithLord:Magorn: SithLord: Who cares. It's old news now. What these men did shouldn't be a crime. They were merely acting out their fantasies in the privacy of their own home. They should be praised for coming out as doms. What they did was not morally corrupt. They should be allowed to marry their subs. Praise the Cleveland police for not prying in the lives of private citizens and letting them carry on their business.

Kids should fear guns, not innocent kidnappers who just want to get their jollies. What is wrong with the close-minded tea-tards?

hey look another "Conservative" who fails to understand the phrase "between CONSENTING adults" HMM, maybe THAT's why Republicans are always going on about rape, because they just can;t wrap thier head around the concept?

Another liberal who doesn't understand I used your side's talking points when stating how morally corrupt this country has become.

No you didn't and that's what I'm pointing out. We Liberals are big believers in "small government" you see, and so don;t believe that, as long as no one is being harmed, the government has a right to regulate private behavior, Thus we are all in favor of anyone getting their swerve on in any fashion they like, so long as A) everyone involved is an adult B) everyone freely consents to the activity at hand. Now which of those two conditions are not present in this scenario? Equating these guys with the S&M community is about as offensive as the idiots that link homosexuality and pedophilia.

SithLord:Who cares. It's old news now. What these men did shouldn't be a crime. They were merely acting out their fantasies in the privacy of their own home. They should be praised for coming out as doms. What they did was not morally corrupt. They should be allowed to marry their subs. Praise the Cleveland police for not prying in the lives of private citizens and letting them carry on their business.

Kids should fear guns, not innocent kidnappers who just want to get their jollies. What is wrong with the close-minded tea-tards?

hey look another "Conservative" who fails to understand the phrase "between CONSENTING adults" HMM, maybe THAT's why Republicans are always going on about rape, because they just can;t wrap thier head around the concept?

Who cares. It's old news now. What these men did shouldn't be a crime. They were merely acting out their fantasies in the privacy of their own home. They should be praised for coming out as doms. What they did was not morally corrupt. They should be allowed to marry their subs. Praise the Cleveland police for not prying in the lives of private citizens and letting them carry on their business.

Kids should fear guns, not innocent kidnappers who just want to get their jollies. What is wrong with the close-minded tea-tards?

Dear news media (and dumbmitter): just because someone says something doesn't mean it's true. In fairness to the media, though, the Boston Marathon was a long, long, long time ago, so the lessons learned in that media debacle have understandably faded.

Exactly. Leading a woman around on a leash, while it might not be your thing, is not illegal.

No, but it is worth looking into. I recall an incident some years back where police busted what they thought was a rape in progress, but when all of the parties were questioned, it turned out to be a staged rape that the woman wanted, a fantasy of hers or something. No one was charged, but some things are worth looking into.

Trust me, man, if the cops were called to "look into" every sex practice someone doesn't like, that would be a Very Bad Thing. For example - in Georgia, thanks to the Hardwick case, blow jobs were illegal until 2003 (Lawrence v Texas). If your neighbor was a batshiat fundie who though blow jobs were a form of coercion, caught a glimpse through your drapes, and called the cops on you every goddamn time you got a blow job, how would that make you feel about things? And they'd be reporting a crime.

Hindsight, 20/20, that sort of thing We know today it was bad. 2 weeks ago, we would have been vilifying the cops for going after people doing something totally legal, especially if the victim had said it was consensual.